PDA

View Full Version : How much influence do you think BCast has on personnel decisions?



fearofpopvol1
08-29-2009, 01:40 AM
I don't necessarily mean the financial side of things, though I understand how that aspect is undeniably intertwined.

But if Walt wants to trade a player, can he just do it? Does BCast have to approve if the Reds aren't taking on additional salary (if they're shedding salary)? Good example would be when Dunn & Griffey were traded last year.

How much influence do you think BCast has on personnel decisions where additional salary is not taken on?

WVRedsFan
08-29-2009, 01:54 AM
If Castillini is a good businessman, and you'd expect that given his success in the produce business, probably not as much as you think. Most CEO's hire what they think are the best people and let them run the business. When things don't go right, they fire that person or persons and then get someone they think will put things on the right track. I probably think this is the way BC runs the Reds, but I could be wrong.

The big probem comes from the manager-GM perspective. Most GM's feel a loyalty to the field manager. It's his club and in most cases, they seek the advise and approval of the field manager for moves. Providing that Dusty and Walt are on the same page, I think that BC probably stays out of the day-to-day and lets them run things. He did this with WK and when he didn't see results, WK was gone.

Just a hunch, but I think you'll see Dusty go long before Walt.

Ron Madden
08-29-2009, 03:38 AM
I could be wrong but I believe Bob plays a big part in personnel decision making. Seems like the Reds have used the callers of local sports talk shows as a gage in what to or what not to do.

The Reds would be much better off with an owner that had the wisdom to hire a good Gm and let him do his job.

redsfandan
08-29-2009, 04:19 AM
Seems like the Reds have used the callers of local sports talk shows as a gage in what to or what not to do. ....
Because that's the right way for the Reds to make decisions. :rolleyes:

Ron Madden
08-29-2009, 04:23 AM
Because that's the right way for the Reds to make decisions. :rolleyes:

:confused:

The Baumer
08-29-2009, 05:18 AM
Just roll your eyes back at him!

redsfandan
08-29-2009, 06:31 AM
Lol Baumer. Ron Madden and I already cleared up the misunderstanding. I wasn't rolling my eyes at him but rather at the thought of the Reds making roster decisions based on people calling in to radio or tv sports talk shows.

klw
08-29-2009, 08:36 AM
Because that's the right way for the Reds to make decisions. :rolleyes:

No clearly they should follow posts of trade suggestions on the internet. :)

bucksfan2
08-29-2009, 09:52 AM
If you owned a business, you would want a say so in the decisions that were made, right?

I would imagine that once a plan is in place that all trades and financial decisions need to be run through Cast, but I doubt that he has much say so in who the Reds do target for a trade. I would imagine that Cast would be very hesitant to trading a few of his players, maybe based upon production, like, or value, but he should put a great deal of trust into his GM.

I would imagine for most owners, it can be difficult to set aside personal likes and dislikes. If you play fantasy football just look at how you draft. In my league Palmer and Ochocinco always go earlier than they would in other cities. At the same time Big Ben always goes later than the average. There are players who you don't like so you don't draft. There are players out there who you like so you take them too soon. Now expand that to a real multi million dollar baseball team in which the players are real, not fantasy. I would imagine it is ever more difficult to let your biases not matter.

KoryMac5
08-29-2009, 10:29 AM
I would imagine he has the final say on trades and signings. I don't think it is a Jerry Jones, Mike Brown, Mark Cuban situation where he is involved in the day to day operations. However I do think Walt and the rest of the crew have an outline of what Cast wants.

Highlifeman21
08-29-2009, 10:55 AM
No clearly they should follow posts of trade suggestions on the internet. :)

Clearly they don't read Krusty's posts, b/c we haven't seen an slobberknockers around these parts.

mth123
08-29-2009, 11:37 AM
The test is to determine who had the idea and approval for Willy T. If Cast was pushing for that, he needs to stick to his produce. If that was Walt's doing, then Cast needs to get real involved.

dougdirt
08-29-2009, 12:01 PM
Bob has some say in moves.... too much from what I have heard. For the most part it sounds like he has had too much say in who doesn't get moved rather than who comes in.

westofyou
08-29-2009, 12:37 PM
If you owned a business, you would want a say so in the decisions that were made, right?

The decisions on signage, the cost of suites, fruit in the suites, tickets, sure..... on baseball decisions.... not so much.

If you look historically at the best teams there is a firm line between owners and baseball decisions. There has to be, when Steinbrenner stuck his nose in the game we got the 1980's Yankees, when Sam Bradon let Branch Rickey run the baseball side of things the Cards built a dynasty, when he got his hands in the jar you ended up with the Cards of the 50's.

BC doesn't have baseball background that doesn't involve ownership, why would he get to make baseball decisions other than because he writes the checks?

Part of being a success is the ability to delegate responsibility to qualified individuals, part of being a failure is often derived from holding all the other decisions against your own opinion and eventually overriding them to placate your own ego.

I don't know how much pull BC has concerning baseball talent decisions, but because he owns the team doesn't mean he should have greater pull than the group of pros that he pays to make those decisions. If he does then chances are the Reds will be running in place for most of his ownership.

WMR
08-29-2009, 12:45 PM
If you owned a business, you would want a say so in the decisions that were made, right?

I would imagine that once a plan is in place that all trades and financial decisions need to be run through Cast, but I doubt that he has much say so in who the Reds do target for a trade. I would imagine that Cast would be very hesitant to trading a few of his players, maybe based upon production, like, or value, but he should put a great deal of trust into his GM.

I would imagine for most owners, it can be difficult to set aside personal likes and dislikes. If you play fantasy football just look at how you draft. In my league Palmer and Ochocinco always go earlier than they would in other cities. At the same time Big Ben always goes later than the average. There are players who you don't like so you don't draft. There are players out there who you like so you take them too soon. Now expand that to a real multi million dollar baseball team in which the players are real, not fantasy. I would imagine it is ever more difficult to let your biases not matter.

Actually the reverse is more likely true.

When millions of dollars are at stake rather than a relatively silly little fantasy draft it is EASIER to divorce yourself from such dumb prejudices simply because the stakes are so high.

That's not to imply that an owner might not retain biases either for or against certain individuals because of his knowledge of the game, or lack thereof, because I feel comfortable stating that is likely the case with Cast.

BCubb2003
08-29-2009, 12:54 PM
I think most owners are tempted to have a say, after all they probably bought the team to make changes in how it was run, but they know it's best to leave the baseball decisions to the baseball people. The trouble comes when the baseball people have spent all the money and come back to the owner, saying we could make this deal or get this player if we could find the money. Now the owner gets involved in which deals get made, and it gets ugly.

fearofpopvol1
08-29-2009, 01:16 PM
Bob has some say in moves.... too much from what I have heard. For the most part it sounds like he has had too much say in who doesn't get moved rather than who comes in.

This is exactly what I was envisioning actually...

and it's not a good thing...at all.

Team Clark
08-29-2009, 01:53 PM
Bob has some say in moves.... too much from what I have heard. For the most part it sounds like he has had too much say in who doesn't get moved rather than who comes in.

Bingo. Bob is emotionally attached and is a HUGE fan. He needs to stay OUT of the mix. Just sign the checks and enjoy his suite.

Spring~Fields
08-29-2009, 02:25 PM
The test is to determine who had the idea and approval for Willy T. If Cast was pushing for that, he needs to stick to his produce. If that was Walt's doing, then Cast needs to get real involved.



One GM #1 brought in Patterson relative to his speed and CF abilities because there was one that wanted that. GM #2 got rid of Patterson and brought in a CF with speed, because there was one that wanted that.
Clearly to me a manager and his coaches wanted that type of player in both cases with two different general managers, and the same owner.

It is fine for the GM to support what his staff wants in players, but GM #1 and GM #2 did not do a good job in their research and obtaining of the two. Get a player with speed that can field his position well in CF and get on base, then it looks like a very good idea. (no, I am not bashing Baker) I don’t think the manager is wrong for wanting a fast CF who can get to the ball, or having a fast leadoff guy that can get on base and make things happen, but, the GM needs to find those that can get on base at a higher percentage of time. We all know that.

On the money side. If it effects the financials, if it effects the budget, then Castellini or his general will be involved in those decisions. You cannot divorce the two when it comes to business.

Castellini is responsible for his words, and is responsible for selling failure to the patrons, and should not be rewarded for failure.

mth123
08-29-2009, 03:45 PM
One GM #1 brought in Patterson relative to his speed and CF abilities because there was one that wanted that. GM #2 got rid of Patterson and brought in a CF with speed, because there was one that wanted that.
Clearly to me a manager and his coaches wanted that type of player in both cases with two different general managers, and the same owner.

It is fine for the GM to support what his staff wants in players, but GM #1 and GM #2 did not do a good job in their research and obtaining of the two. Get a player with speed that can field his position well in CF and get on base, then it looks like a very good idea. (no, I am not bashing Baker) I donít think the manager is wrong for wanting a fast CF who can get to the ball, or having a fast leadoff guy that can get on base and make things happen, but, the GM needs to find those that can get on base at a higher percentage of time. We all know that.

On the money side. If it effects the financials, if it effects the budget, then Castellini or his general will be involved in those decisions. You cannot divorce the two when it comes to business.

Castellini is responsible for his words, and is responsible for selling failure to the patrons, and should not be rewarded for failure.


I'm kind of joking. I'd actually bet Dusty was the driving force behind both Patterson and Taveras, but Walt's the GM, so he takes the heat for Willy IMO.

Spring~Fields
08-29-2009, 03:52 PM
I'm kind of joking. I'd actually bet Dusty was the driving force behind both Patterson and Taveras, but Walt's the GM, so he takes the heat for Willy IMO.

I think that you're right. I think that the GM and his talented staff are responsible for finding the players that fit the bill or plan of the manager. If the GM goes out and gets speed that can't find their way to first base with a video, gps, and road map, that is on the GM. :)

The Baumer
08-29-2009, 03:58 PM
If Willy had a GPS he would prob drive into the lake.

Spring~Fields
08-29-2009, 04:11 PM
If Willy had a GPS he would prob drive into the lake.

He'd "hit" the wrong button. :)